Slashdot Mirror
Konqueror Compiled For Mac OS X; KOffice Next
scishop writes "Benjamin Reed has just compiled Konqueror for Mac OS X after porting the KUniqueApplication class. A screenshot of the running program can be found here. According to Reed's blog, 'next up is KOffice.'"
Konquerer is my browser of choice on Linux, and it's cool that we've got another choice for browser. Yeah, I use Safari, but as this is one step to porting most of the KDE stuff, I can't help but wonder if this is a big step towards the holy grail of Linux-to-MacOSX conversions, OpenOffice.
-- Funksaw
Finall, a capable browser for Samba networks for Macs! Finder crashes and just plain doesn't work for me browsing Windows networks from my Powerbook running Panther. Whereas typing smb:/// in Konqueror just works like Apple claims Finder does.
This guy is way out there
Why bother? I seriously doubt anyone would go full-tilt KDE on an OS X box. Mozilla or Firebird are great browser choices.. Why bother to port Konqueror?
Konqueror is more than just a web browser. I would install it on Mac OS X to get all the wonderful KIO slaves that come with it like tar and sftp.
I'd say that covering platforms is important, because when someone says, but do you suppot Blah, you can answer that yes, indeed, you do.
Keep in mind that short term tactics are great, but strategy is what frequently offers tactical brilliance a place to shine. If KDE is everywhere, people will start to use it. That's useful. for KDE. See? Think companies, down the road.
-j, who really can't stand such heavyweight stuff.
I forget what 8 was for.
It's more than just about a browser. It's about porting Linux/KDE stuff over without middlemen like X11. That's a nice little achievement.
:-)
And if someone really really sees no point, THEY DON"T HAVE TO USE IT.
Actually, information would like a turkey sandwich.
At it's core, this is simply a UI choice. Do you like how Safari renders, but don't like the interface? Now you've got another choice. Not too thrilled with Mozilla? Again, another choice.
This also signals the beginning of an infusion of KDE apps into Mac OS X. Basically, this proves it can be done and more are likely to follow.
This is a real achievement,...
No, it was just a lot of work. There is a difference, though I suspect that detail is lost on a lot of people here.
It's no worse than all the OSX apps that start with a lowercase "i".
There are no tiger attacks in my area and it's all because this rock I'm holding keeps the tigers away.
A lot of window toolkit designers apparently think they can do a better job--of course they are wrong and it ends up slow and bloated. I believe wxWindows actually does the intelligent thing and uses native widgets.
Now of course we are both going to get modded offtopic into oblivion because we're not singing the praises of Konqueror for Mac OS X. So, uhh, praise be to Konqueror for Mac OS X?
Well, the reasons for porting KDE to Mac OS X natively and the reasons why someone would want to use Konqueror on OS X may be different.
.war files (I do not know if this is an exclusive Konqueror feature or not, and I don't care - it is extremely useful).
Konqueror is not just a browser. It is also a file manager (kind of like Windows Explorer on SuperMan steroids). It suppors io-slaves, which gives Konqueror network transparency that I do not think is paralleled by any other file browser right now. Also, some people dislike the OS X Finder and would prefer to use Konqueror instead.
Konqueror is pretty cool - it has all the latest features such as tabbed browsing, but it also allows to split any view into two (and then again) - you can make it look like Norton Commander if you like.
Konqueror also supports archiving web pages as
So, there are many reasons someone would want to use Konqueror, and not just on OS X or Linux.
The reason to port to OS X could be so that KDE were less dependent on X11 hacks and used Qt API more thoroughly, I don't know. The thing is - the more portable the code is, the fewer bugs there are (unless of course they start #ifdef-ing everywhere, then it just turns into a mess of duplicated non-portable code).
Paul.
Maybe as an early step to porting KOffice or some of the other more useful KDE applications. They're just starting off with the (relatively) easier ones.
Or maybe they're just working out some of the bugs in using Qt/Mac as a demonstration to show how to port other Qt based apps to OS X?
To be honest, I really dunno the answer, but given that the OpenOffice port to native Aqua doesn't seem to be moving along that quickly, it'll be nice to have some free non-X11 office apps available.
Now if only they could make it actually LOOK like a Mac app...
fuck you.
Since you're apparently a Linux fan, I'd expect you to agree that a relatively small market share doesn't necessarily mean something is "also-ran." The fact that more people use Mozilla doesn't make Konqueror bad, and so on. I prefer Firebird myself, but that doesn't mean KHTML-based browsers are worthless.
I've read most of your posts today and there hasnt been one remark that hasnt been bitchy.
Lay off the caffeine or get laid finally but your atittude is starting to wear thin.
What's next? Challenge someone to a fight?
Seriously dude, get a life.
Pierre Vatefaire-Foutre
First, how much catching up Mac OS X still has to do in some respects to Linux. For example, one article in the German magazine "MacWelt" talks about defragmenting the harddisk (!) with Panther. There are all kinds of small things like multiple desktops that I can't seem to find (some of which are of course going to be due to my lack of experience). Of course, in some areas like multimedia Panther simply shreds Linux. When is there going to be a KDE version of iMovie, an Mac fan might ask with some justification.
Second, it is depressing to see how obsessed with money the Mac people still are. This is almost as bad as the Windows crowd. Going through the magazines, program after program is shareware, US$ 30 here, US$ 60 there. The sad part is that these programs are usually small, ridiculously simple tools that Linux includes for free. One good thing about getting KDE to run on the Quartz graphic engine is that it might give the average Apple user a clue to how bad greed is for software development.
Third, the lack of choice. You get one way of doing things with Apple -- a good, well designed, clever, well thought out, ergonomic way, for sure, but that is it. You have to get over feelings like "but where are the other browsers?" or "where are all the other desktops?" at the beginning if you have been using Linux for any period of time. Yeah, you know you're getting what you're getting into, but actually sitting there with one program of a certain time is still a shock.
Don't get me wrong -- I'm going to spend serious money for that iBook. Apple is on the right track here: Printing with CUPS, X11 now included, and bash as the default terminal, so I can go back to blackbox when I'm tried of all the bells and whistles. But when you get past the cool design and ignore the far, far superior multimedia tools, Tux can hold its beak high and proud. Apple is going to have to peddle really hard if they want to continue to want money for their OS.
There are some apps that have less in the way of choice on the Mac, but with Fink and the now built-in X11, there's much more choice than say OS9.
:D
:D
In regards to browsers, there's Mozilla, Firebird, OmniWeb, iCab, Opera, Safari, Konqueror, and Camino. (My favorite being Camino...)
Mail apps? Plenty. Editors? Plenty. I have 6 right now, not including TextEdit (only two cost money.)
I'm glad to hear you're moving to the Mac. I did it a couple of years ago, and my Linux box has become a server....I won't go back to Desktop Linux for the foreseeable future.
Fear not, though....there's plenty of choice. (With the exception of Window Managers..but you can run your favorite X WM fullscreen if you wish)...
I don't think Apple will have to peddle very hard to charge for their OS, though. It's indeed superior in many ways to what's available for free, and it also encompasses choice, something that was Linux's sole domain before OSX. I like linux too, but my OS of choice is worth every penny. Forget Windows...
OSX just works....I can spend hours twiddling with it, or I can set up and go with no troubles at all. That's the beauty of OSX.
---
It's the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man.
Konqueror does all of that because it is not a file manager, web browser etc. It is a kpart embedder. It embeds khtml to do html rendering and other stuff for other things. I can embed kate, kword, kpdf etc for other things. It can speak all of those protocols because every kde app can. You can use sftp, smb, imap, pop3 etc from ANY kde application. Although why you would want to open a pop3 connection from kword I am not sure but it does work. Any file dialog box in kde can use any of the io slaves.
That also means that you can paste any url that kio understand into a file upload box in a webpage and it will deal with it and have the webpage the content of that url. That saves such a large ammount of time doing web apps and lots of other things. Give an sftp url to some data and just have it load it up.
Computer modeling for biotech drug manufacturing is HARD!
Macintosh as a platform would have died a long time ago if it wasn't for those greedy shareware developers you have such disdain for. Some of the best pieces of software available for the Mac have been shareware applications. Most of these applications don't force you to buy them in order to get full functionality. Some people want too much money for ridiculously simple applications but you're under no obligation to purchase or use them.
Besides Mac-only shareware there's literally thousands of OS programs available through Fink, GNU-Darwin, and Darwin Ports. If one of these free as in speech apps works better or as well as a shareware one use it instead of the shareware, vote with your wallet.
There's also plenty of choice in your Mac specific applications. There's several browsers, mail clients, IM programs, media players, editors, and whatever else you want. Not all of them are free or open source but your options are definitely not limited to commercial products.
I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
This is exactly contrary to Apple's UI tradition of doing something one way and doing it right. Apple dislikes the form of choice you offer because it creates inconsistancy in the end user experience.
Apple didn't port Konqueror, they ported KHTML and its associated libraries. This became WebCore, the rendering and JavaScript engine that now comes as a part of Mac OS X. WebCore is used by Safari, OmniWeb, and several other application to handle their rendering and some other jobs that a web browser needs to handle.
So I'm sure that Konqueror is quite a bit different than Safari or OmniWeb, although they all use the same or similar rendering engines they are all quite different front ends to that renderer. They all sound like they are great programs, but each has its own features/disadvantages.
Sapere aude!